The idea that the Church was “running the governments” (outside the papal states) is incorrect. The last time any pope made that pretense was Boniface VIII, who ended up in a French dungeon. The “Babylonian captivity” in Avignon then followed, which ended up in a schism and several pretenders to the papal throne. The schism was finally healed by church councils, but the growing powers of the national kings limited the ability of the pope even to rally Europe against the Turks. The capture of Constantinople and the conquest of the Balkans ended any hope of unifying the Western and Eastern Church. War among the Italian City states, diverted the popes attention to preserving its control of the papal states, and to dressing up Rome with stately new buildings, since the crusader tax was not been spent for its intended purpose. The Germans especially resented this, a tax that drained gold from the German states. The resentment of the abuse of indulgences was, despite what we think we know, was an aggravation of an existing grievance. You may recall that Luther was not much alarmed by the Turkish threat, which he saw more as divine judgement, and the German princes resisted the Emperor’s efforts to end the religious division that Protestantism had caused, in order to present a united front to the Turks. At the same time, the Emperor’s differences with the pope over WHO was the appropriate one to lead Europe against the invader after the fall of Hungary to the Turks, led to the sack of Rome. That the Reformation was not properly addressed until 1530 was not only because of petty politics and certainly not because the pope was embroiled in international politics, but because Europe was divided in the face of an invasion of Europe by the ablest of the Turkish Sultans. Sulieman the Magnificent.
Well, Francis sure seems to be giving it a go lately from everything I've read about his comments about social welfare.